According to Buddhist scriptures for every fully enlightened Buddha there is a terrestrial Bo-tree or Bodhi-tree:-
"I give a list of 7 Buddhas and their trees:- Vipasi, Patala (Bignonia); Sikki, Pundrika (Lotus) ; Visvabhu, Sala (Shoria robusta); Karakchch. 'handa, Saresha (Accaciasirisa); Kanakamuni, Udambra; Kasyapa, Nyagrodha (Banian tree); Sakyamuni, Asvatha (Ficus religiosa.)" (The Popular Life of Buddha by Lillie. p. 232.)
The Bo-tree for the Buddha Maitreya is "The tree of Dragon flower." (I-tsing by Takakusu. p. 213.)
According to Sanskrit English Dictionary by L. R. Vaidya the dragon flower is "The Champak tree".
According to Watters this tree is "Champac." (Vol. II. p. 52.)
I-tsing calls the Bo-tree of the Buddha Maitreya "Naga tree." (Takakusu. p. 213. foot note.)
According to Sanskrit English Dictionary by L. R. Vaidya, the Naga. Tree is "Naga kesser tree"
According to some of the modern Buddhist scholars, the Bo-tree of the Buddha Maitreya is the "Iron-wood tree." (M. B. J: 1929. p. 280.)
Iron-wood tree is the name "applied to a wide variety of trees." (Webster) "Any tree with unusually hard or heavy wood," (Chamber's. Ency.) can be called the Ironwood tree. Thus we cannot tell with certainly the name of the Bodhi tree of the Buddha Maitreya.
The name of the Bodhi tree of Mohammed at Hodebeyya also cannot be stated with certainty
(1) Sale, on the authority of several Arabic works considers it, "an Egyptian thorn", or "a kind of lote tree." (P. 494. Foot note.)
(2) According to Muslim it is "Samorah," or "Shajar-Rizwan."
(3) According to Munjid it is "Irak."
The Koran gives this tree the name, "Shajar." (XLVIII)
According to Arabic 'English Lexicon by Lane the word, Shajar, stands for "any tree with a hard stem;" hence we can say that the tree at Hodebeyya was a species of Iron-wood tree.
The view of Wahid-ul-zaman Khan, the translator of Muslim, about this tree is:-
"The tree is now no more, as it was cut down by Omar, on learning that people used to gather round about it." (M. Vol. V. pp. 2000-1.)
In my opinion Mr. Wahid-ul-zaman is wrong in his opinion. The reason is easy to deduce from the following traditions:-
(1) "Saeed-bin-Mosaib relates:-My father was one of those who took the oath of allegiance to the apostle of God under the tree; he said, "When we came to pilgrimage next year, we could not identify the place of the tree; if you can, you know more (than I do)." (M. Vol. V. pp. 2000-2)
(2) "Saeed-bin-Mosaib relates from his father next year the companions (of the prophet) forgot (the tree, and could not identify it.)' " (Ibid. p.2002.)
(3) "Saeed-bin-Mosaib relates:-I had seen the tree (of allegiance); when I came again there I could not identify it." (Ibid. p. 2002)
Shankaracharya had no Bo-tree. There is no mention of the Bo-tree of Jesus in the Gospels. Hence neither Jesus nor Shankaracharya can be the Buddha Maitreya. As Mohammed had a tree which for some reasons given here and elsewhere, we call the Bo-tree, hence he is the Buddha Maitreya.
Back To Islam Awareness Homepage
Latest News about Islam and Muslims